X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-Id:	<1237214588.8102.1305648083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
From:	"Charles Wilson" <cygwin AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm>
To:	"cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: gcc4-java: packaging error?
Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:43:08 -0400
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

This is an interesting thread, related to the future (and/or current
state) of gcj:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2009-02/msg00004.html

Which is not to say that cygwin's gcc distribution shouldn't include it,
or ensure that it works as well as possible, but it may explain why some
distros are packaging it separately (that is, building it from a
separate source from the rest of gcc-same-version).  OTOH, Debian has
been doing it that way since 4.1.0 (2 Mar 2006), long before OpenJDK was
actually open [*], so perhaps they have another reason. They do it that
way for Ada, too.

--
Chuck

[*] Sun's announcement of a forth-coming GPLed JDK: Nov 2006.  OpenJDK
initial code release, May 2007.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -